BACKGROUND: The commonly-accepted "biopsychosocial model" does not always lend itself to the kind of pragmatic decisions that many clinical situations demand of physicians. OBJECTIVE: The authors attempt to identify and close gaps in the biopsychosocial model that hinder its application in certain real-life clinical situations. METHOD: The authors review some of the current and historical literature on the development and application of the biopsychosocial model, and argue the shortcomings of this modality in various clinical situations. RESULTS: The authors present three dicta to guide clinicians toward relevant areas of inquiry: 1) Think neuroanatomically; 2) Think existentially; and 3) Think "dirty;" that is, understand that patients and physicians sometimes work toward different goals. DISCUSSION: These dicta form an addendum to the biopsychosocial model, identifying and filling three specific, commonly-encountered gaps in that paradigm, which, ironically, is usually considered all-inclusive.
BACKGROUND: The commonly-accepted "biopsychosocial model" does not always lend itself to the kind of pragmatic decisions that many clinical situations demand of physicians. OBJECTIVE: The authors attempt to identify and close gaps in the biopsychosocial model that hinder its application in certain real-life clinical situations. METHOD: The authors review some of the current and historical literature on the development and application of the biopsychosocial model, and argue the shortcomings of this modality in various clinical situations. RESULTS: The authors present three dicta to guide clinicians toward relevant areas of inquiry: 1) Think neuroanatomically; 2) Think existentially; and 3) Think "dirty;" that is, understand that patients and physicians sometimes work toward different goals. DISCUSSION: These dicta form an addendum to the biopsychosocial model, identifying and filling three specific, commonly-encountered gaps in that paradigm, which, ironically, is usually considered all-inclusive.